What's new

Pakistan's growing arsenal NYT editorial

Status
Not open for further replies.

ito

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Jun 5, 2014
Messages
9,177
Reaction score
-33
Country
India
Location
India
Urging world powers to persuade Pakistan to rein in its nuclear weapons programme, The New York Times editorial board wrote on Sunday that the country presents a danger to the entire world.

“The fact that Pakistan is also home to a slew of extremist groups, some of which are backed by a paranoid security establishment obsessed with India, only adds to the dangers it presents for South Asia and, indeed, the entire world,” the editorial read.

Pakistan will become fifth largest nuclear power by 2025: report

The paper, recognising Pakistan’s fast growing nuclear arsenal and its status to become the world’s third-ranked nuclear power in a decade, said, “These are unsettling truths.”

“Persuading Pakistan to rein in its nuclear weapons program should be an international priority. The major world powers spent two years negotiating an agreement to restrain the nuclear ambitions of Iran, which doesn’t have a single nuclear weapon. Yet, there has been no comparable investment of effort in Pakistan, which, along with India, has so far refused to consider any limits at all,” it added.

Noting that there was no headway made during Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s recent visit to Washington despite the Obama administration beginning to address the “complicated issue with greater urgency and imagination”, the editorial said, “The odds of success seem small.”

PM to tell US it won’t accept limits on tactical nuclear arms

“Yet it would be wrong not to keep trying, especially at a time of heightened tensions between Pakistan and India over Kashmir and terrorism,” it added.

Regarding US striking a nuclear deal with Pakistan, the editorial board said, “What’s new about the administration’s approach is that instead of treating the situation as essentially hopeless, it is now casting about for the elements of a possible deal in which each side would get something it wants.”

“For the West, that means restraint by Pakistan and greater compliance with international rules for halting the spread of nuclear technology. For Pakistan, that means some acceptance in the family of nuclear powers and access to technology.”

Nuclear war between India and Pakistan not as unlikely as you think

Recalling international sanctions slapped on Pakistan after it tested a nuclear weapon in 1998, the board said Pakistan is a “pariah in the nuclear sphere to all but China.”

“Pakistan has done itself no favours by refusing to join the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and by giving nuclear know-how to bad actors like North Korea. Yet, it is seeking treatment equal to that given to India by the West,” it noted.

Claiming the US is not offering Pakistan an India-like generous nuclear cooperation deal that allowed New Delhi to buy American nuclear energy technology, the editorial quoted American officials as saying they are discussing what Pakistan needs to do to justify American support for its membership in the 48-nation Nuclear Supplier Group, which governs trade in nuclear fuel and technology.

Tactical nukes to counter India’s cold start doctrine: Aizaz

“As a first step, one American official said, Pakistan would have to stop pursuing tactical nuclear weapons, which are more likely to be used in a conflict with India and could more easily fall into the hands of terrorists, and halt development of long-range missiles. Pakistan should also sign the treaty banning nuclear weapons tests,” the editorial read.

“Such moves would undoubtedly be in Pakistan’s long-term interest. It cannot provide adequate services for its citizens because it spends about 25% of its budget on defense. Pakistan’s army, whose chief of staff is due to visit Washington this month, says it needs still more nuclear weapons to counter India’s conventional arsenal,” it added.

Further, the board advised that Pakistan’s competition with India, which is also adding its own nuclear arsenal, is “a losing game” and the country’s allies such as China “should be pushing Pakistan to accept that.”

No civil nuclear ‘deal’ being discussed with US, says Foreign Office

“Meanwhile, Narendra Modi, India’s prime minister, has done nothing to engage Islamabad on security issues, and he also bears responsibility for current tensions. The nuclear arms race in South Asia, which is growing more intense, demands far greater international attention,” the editorial concluded.

Pakistan presents danger to entire world: NYT editorial - The Express Tribune
 
. .
So the writer is trying to say that, illegal US wars & continuos killings of Israel in Palestine & Indian killing in Kashmir is all ok, but Pakistan advancing in nukes is not ok?

Where is the information on US wars, Palestine & Kashmir in the post? The post is all about Pak nukes.
 
.
Kashmir is the Nuclear flash-point between Pakistan and india. Resolve this issue as early as possible considering sufferings of people of Kashmir.
One more suggestion for India is to reduce conventional military strength to 1:1 against Pakistan.
Develop your economy and focus on regional peace through cooperation and peaceful resolution of disputes.
 
Last edited:
.
Kashmir is the Nuclear flash-point between Pakistan and india. Resolve this issue as early as possible considering sufferings of people of Kashmir.
One more suggestion for India is to reduce conventional military strength to 1:1 against Pakistan.
Develop your economy and focus on regional peace through cooperation and peaceful resolution of disputes.

I think, I remember you making the same argument some where else. India is 8 times larger than Pakistan so 1:1 is illogical to say the least and then as regarding Kashmir as a Nuclear flash point, I don't think and neither do the world. World is more concerned about nuclear bombs falling with rogue army general or a terrorist group.
 
.
Yeah, New York Times, just like Saddam had weapons of Mass Destruction. Limiting Pakistan's Nuclear program isn't the solution - It's the Kashmir issue. Soon both Pakistan and India come to terms on Kashmir, arms race, at least on Pakistan's end, would be diminished to a certain extent. Can't say the same about India though since India has to deal with China as well. Destability is in U.S' interest otherwise Kashmir Issue would cease to exist.

The only country that poses threat to the entire world Physically is U.S and ideologically is Saudi.
Would love for NYT to take on that sometime.
 
.
yeah beeeatchh we are the Bad Guys .. very dangerous .. Be afraid..Be very very Afraid U Saffron Chadi :sniper::guns:
 
.
Kashmir is the Nuclear flash-point between Pakistan and india. Resolve this issue as early as possible considering sufferings of people of Kashmir.
One more suggestion for India is to reduce conventional military strength to 1:1 against Pakistan.
Develop your economy and focus on regional peace through cooperation and peaceful resolution of disputes.

I have a better suggestion. Why doesn't Pakistan increase it's conventional military strength so that it's 1:1. :D
 
.
Kashmir is the Nuclear flash-point between Pakistan and india. Resolve this issue as early as possible considering sufferings of people of Kashmir.
One more suggestion for India is to reduce conventional military strength to 1:1 against Pakistan.
Develop your economy and focus on regional peace through cooperation and peaceful resolution of disputes.

Terrorists and those who are responsible for instigating terrorism in Kashmir have to be brought to justice. Those who have been affected have to be duly compensated. Then we can move forward together, if required. Otherwise, we can simply move forward anyway.

So far as military strength and everything else is concerned, did you forget the fact that Pakistan is much smaller a country ? India's military budget only is more than entire federal budget of Pakistan, which suits India. You should do what suits you.
 
.
Yeah, New York Times, just like Saddam had weapons of Mass Destruction. Limiting Pakistan's Nuclear problem isn't the solution - It's the Kashmir issue. Soon both Pakistan and India come to terms on Kashmir, arms race, at least on Pakistan's end, would be diminished to a certain extent. Can't say the same about India though since India has to deal with China as well. Destability is in U.S' interest otherwise Kashmir Issue would cease to exist.

The only country that poses to threat entire world Physically is U.S and ideologically is Saudi.

Kashmir issue will cease to exist, the minute Pakistan stop supporting insurgencies in Kashmir.

As regarding Kashmir, I don't see any sense for India to come to table for Pakistan. In fact, it is in India's interest to keep Kashmir issue alive as it will keep Pakistan in perpetual underdeveloped and as a military state.
 
.
I think, I remember you making the same argument some where else. India is 8 times larger than Pakistan so 1:1 is illogical to say the least and then as regarding Kashmir as a Nuclear flash point, I don't think and neither do the world. World is more concerned about nuclear bombs falling with rogue army general or a terrorist group.

Kashmir A Nuclear Flash Point
 
. .
Regarding US striking a nuclear deal with Pakistan, the editorial board said, “What’s new about the administration’s approach is that instead of treating the situation as essentially hopeless, it is now casting about for the elements of a possible deal in which each side would get something it wants.

Any deal is which "each side would get something it wants" is the best practical way forward. It all depends on whether such common grounds can be found.
 
.
NYT can go fcuk itself along with India, USA and others. there is absolutely no reason to listen to them, what india is we know too well and about USA ,the amount of mayhem they have created in this world, they are the biggest threat to the world now.
 
. .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom